PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1973419

Coronary artery reoperations.

Abstract

From June 1976 to June 1989, 138 previously revascularized coronary patients were reoperated upon. This represents 3.28% of all aortocoronary bypass procedures performed during the same period in our institution. Characteristics of this group, risk factors, coronarographic data, perioperative morbidity and mortality are analyzed and compared to the data of the general population undergoing bypass surgery. The mean age of individuals requiring reoperation was 59 years. The mean interval between the two operations reached 73 months (5 to 180 months). Angiographic lesions were more extensive with three-vessel disease in 65% of the reoperated patients. The mean ejection fraction was 55%. A mean of 2.1 bypass grafts per patient were inserted with 60% of cases having an internal mammary artery graft. Perioperative infarction occurred in 8.0% of the reoperations and an intraaortic balloon counterpulsation was necessary in 4.3% at the end of the procedure. Operative mortality was 5%. Symptomatic improvement was obtained in 85% of the cases. In recent years, cardiac transplantation has been performed for 11 previously bypassed patients with severely impaired ventricular function. There were no postoperative deaths. Cardiac transplantation can be considered as a more valuable alternative to repeat coronary artery bypass grafting in such cases.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

H Van Damme, E Creemers, G Dekoster, T Grenade, J Fourny, R Limet. Coronary artery reoperations.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1973419/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A quality guarantee in acute coronary syndromes: the American College of Cardiology's Guidelines Applied in Practice program taken real-time.

BACKGROUND: Wide variation exists in the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), which includes an apparent underutilization of evidence-based therapies. We have previously demonstrated that application of the American College of Cardiology Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) tools can improve quality indicator rates and outcomes of patients hospitalized with ACS. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a real-time system for monitoring key quality-of-care indicators using GAP would improve both process indicators and outcomes beyond those of the initial implementation of GAP. DESIGN: Prospective patient identification, prospective chart coding, retrospective data abstraction. PATIENTS: All patients with ACS admitted (N = 3189) to our institution between January 1, 1999, and December 2004; 2019 studied before real-time implementation from January 1, 1999, to June 30, 2002, and 1170 studied during real-time implementation from July 1, 2002, to December 31, 2004. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The effect of real-time monitoring of key quality indicators on inhospital therapy and outcomes, and 6-month outcomes in patients admitted with ACS. RESULTS: The real-time GAP implementation correlated with more frequent use of inhospital angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (72.7% vs 63.7%, P < .0001), beta blockers (93.0% vs 89.7%, P = .0016), statins (81.2% vs 65.9%, P < .0001), antiplatelet agents (69.2% vs 22.5%, P < .0001), and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (35.5% vs 26.7%, P < .0001). There were fewer episodes of inhospital congestive heart failure (3.85% vs 8.77%, P < .0001) and major bleeding events (3.2% vs 7.9%, P < .0001) after the real-time system was adopted. Real-time GAP also resulted in higher discharge rates of aspirin (92.1% vs 86.5%, P < .0001), beta blockers (86.8% vs 79.1%, P < .0001), statins (81.2% vs 64.7%, P < .0001), and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (67.1% vs 55.5%, P < .0001). Real-time GAP implementation was associated with fewer rehospitalizations for heart disease (19.8% vs 25.2%, P = .0014), myocardial infarction (3.5% vs 5.4%, P = .0243), and combined death/cerebrovascular accident/myocardial infarction (9.5% vs 13.9%, P = .0009) during the first 6 months after discharge. CONCLUSION: The institution of a formal system to review and "guarantee" key quality-of-care indicators real time in the hospital is associated with improved outcomes in patients admitted with ACS. The combination of American College of Cardiology's GAP program and its real-time implementation leads to higher use of evidence-based therapies and correspondingly better outcomes than those associated with the initial GAP implementation.

Angina, Unstable↗